LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rameshwar Sahu <rsahu@apm.com>
To: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
Cc: dan.j.williams@intel.com, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jcm@redhat.com,
	patches@apm.com, Loc Ho <lho@apm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] dmaengine: Add support for APM X-Gene SoC DMA engine driver
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:08:21 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFd313zqetJq1S8aXK4i_PCLK1RCAwkzoiYGUd_9YSYvwjA=iw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150317101953.GC32683@intel.com>

Hi Vinod,

On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 03:03:14PM +0530, Rameshwar Sahu wrote:
>> Hi Vinod,
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:01 PM, Rameshwar Sahu <rsahu@apm.com> wrote:
>> > Hi Vinod,
>> >
>> > On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 9:56 PM, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com> wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 05:24:34PM +0530, Rameshwar Sahu wrote:
>> >>> >> >> +static void xgene_dma_free_desc_list_reverse(struct xgene_dma_chan *chan,
>> >>> >> >> +                                          struct list_head *list)
>> >>> >> > do we really care about free order?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Yes it start dellocation of descriptor by tail.
>> >>> > and why by tail is not clear.
>> >>> We can free allocated descriptor in forward order from head or in
>> >>> reverse order, I just followed here fsldma.c driver.
>> >>> Does this make sense ??
>> >> No, you have two APIs to free list. Why do you need two?
>> >
>> > Yes, basically we have tow API to free list.
>> > xgene_dma_free_desc_list_reverse will call if any failure in
>> > allocation of memory from DMA pool in prep routines.
>> > Like e.g. in prep routing we have some descriptors allocated and still
>> > need to get descriptor to complete the DMA request and failure happen,
>> > so we need to free all allocated descriptor.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> > where are you mapping dma buffers?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>  I didn't get you here. Can you please explain me here what you mean.
>> >>> >> As per my understanding client should map the dma buffer and give the
>> >>> >> physical address and size to this callback prep routines.
>> >>> > not for memcpy, that is true for slave transfers
>> >>> >
>> >>> > For mempcy the idea is that drivers will do buffer mapping
>> >>>
>> >>> Still I am clear here, why memcpy will do buffer mapping, I see other
>> >>> drivers and also async_memcpy.c , they only map it and pass mapped
>> >>> physical dma address to driver.
>> >>>
>> >>> Buffer mapping mean you here is dma_map_xxx ?? Am I correct.
>> >> Yes
>> >
>> > I have confusion here, I don't see any driver dma buffer mapping in
>> > prep_dma_memcpy.
>> > Can you please clear me here if driver does this on behalf of client,
>> > like any example so that I can proceed further.
>>
>> Any comment here ??
> The advise typically is that for memcpy the dma mapping should be done by
> client. For now this is okay as we have precedence, let me check with Dan.
>>
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> > why are you calling this here, status check shouldnt do this...
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Okay, I will remove it.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> >> +                     spin_unlock_bh(&chan->lock);
>> >>> >> >> +                     return DMA_IN_PROGRESS;
>> >>> >> > residue here is size of transacation.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> We can't calculate here residue size. We don't have any controller
>> >>> >> register which will tell about remaining transaction size.
>> >>> > Okay if you cant calculate residue why do we have this fn?
>> >>>
>> >>> So basically case here for me is completion of dma descriptor
>> >>> submitted to hw is not same as order of submission to hw.
>> >>> So scenario coming in multithread running :e.g. let's assume we have
>> >>> submitted two descriptors first has cookie 1001 and second has 1002,
>> >>> now 1002 is completed first, so updated last_completed_cookie as 1002
>> >>> but not yer checked for dma_tx_status, and then first cookie completes
>> >>> and update last_completed_cookie as 1001, now second transaction check
>> >>> for tx_status and it get DMA_IN_PROGRESS, because
>> >>> last_completed_cookie(1001) is less than second transaction's
>> >>> cookie(1002).
>> >>>
>> >>> Due to this issue I am traversing that transaction in pending list and
>> >>> running list, if not there means we are done.
>> >>>
>> >>> Does this make sense??
>> >> That only convinces me that there is something not so correct.
>> >>
>> >> To help me understand pls let me know if below is fine:
>> >> - for a physical channel, do you submit multiple transactions?
>> >
>> > Yes
>> >
>> >> - if yes, how does DMA deal with multiple transactions, how does it schedule
>> >>   them?
>> >
>> > So , basically we submit multiple descriptor to dma physical channel,
>> > and dma engine execute it one by one and give us completion callback.
>> > So in this way we expect callback on same order as submission order
>> > and it does also, no issue.
>> >
>> > But problem is with supporting p+q offload, here we have P
>> > functionality supports in dma physical channel 0 and Q functionality
>> > supports in dma physical channel 1. So for pq we need to submit two
>> > descriptor, one to channel 0 and second to channel1, in this case we
>> > can't expect the completion order, because channnel 0 can finish P
>> > before Q or vice versa, and we need to wait to complete both before
>> > calling client callback() and completing cookie.
>> > Second thing we submit memcpy and sg on same channel, and can complete
>> > before even though if it submitted after PQ.
>>
>> So our SoC dma engine hw design idea was to get more throughput while
>> running two channel concurrent and calculating the P and Q together,
>> but somehow now today we came to scenario where running P and Q on
>> different channel causing hang to dmaengine, some hw bug, So now I am
>> going to support P and Q generation in same channel, so above
>> mentioned cookie status scenario will never come.
>> I will send you the patch for review.
> Okay, so I am going to expect the status callback will do as per API
> expectations and these kinds of hacks will be absent in the code :)

Yes, I will send patch ASAP for further review.
>
> --
> ~Vinod
>>
>> Thanks,
>> >
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> ~Vinod
>> >> --
>> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dmaengine" in
>> >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> >> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> --

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-17 10:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-12 11:15 [PATCH v7 0/3] dmaengine: APM X-Gene SoC DMA engine driver support Rameshwar Prasad Sahu
2015-03-12 11:15 ` [PATCH v7 1/3] dmaengine: Add support for APM X-Gene SoC DMA engine driver Rameshwar Prasad Sahu
2015-03-16  9:27   ` Vinod Koul
2015-03-16 10:30     ` Rameshwar Sahu
2015-03-16 11:27       ` Vinod Koul
2015-03-16 11:54         ` Rameshwar Sahu
2015-03-16 16:26           ` Vinod Koul
2015-03-16 17:31             ` Rameshwar Sahu
2015-03-17  9:33               ` Rameshwar Sahu
2015-03-17 10:19                 ` Vinod Koul
2015-03-17 10:38                   ` Rameshwar Sahu [this message]
2015-03-16 11:02     ` Rameshwar Sahu
2015-03-12 11:15 ` [PATCH v7 2/3] arm64: dts: Add APM X-Gene DMA device and DMA clock DTS nodes Rameshwar Prasad Sahu
2015-03-12 11:15 ` [PATCH v7 3/3] Documentation: dma: Add APM X-Gene SoC DMA engine driver documentation Rameshwar Prasad Sahu
2015-03-16  9:29   ` Vinod Koul
2015-03-16 10:31     ` Rameshwar Sahu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAFd313zqetJq1S8aXK4i_PCLK1RCAwkzoiYGUd_9YSYvwjA=iw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=rsahu@apm.com \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jcm@redhat.com \
    --cc=lho@apm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=patches@apm.com \
    --cc=vinod.koul@intel.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v7 1/3] dmaengine: Add support for APM X-Gene SoC DMA engine driver' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).